Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Raw Files

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Adirondackiteer
    commented on 's reply
    Its a Samsung 6 series from a couple years ago. UN40MU6300F I am sure only newer models available now but their 6 series has always been a good balance for me for price & features. Just make sure it has chroma 4:4:4 and your video card can support 4k. Maybe thats more normal now but my card did not, had to spend a bit on GeForce gaming card to get 4k HDMI output. May be more options now, not sure if they started putting display port on TVs yet (so you could use a workstation graphics card instead of gaming).

    I used to use a nice 27" IPS 1440 panel flanked by two smaller 19"s . I much prefer the single bigger 40".

  • Neil
    replied
    Originally posted by Adirondackiteer View Post


    I for one do most of my viewing on my computer, 4k screen 40".
    What are the particulars of your screen? (make, model etc.) I am using an old LG Flatron W2043T and am thinking of upgrading.

    Leave a comment:


  • Adirondackiteer
    replied
    A little late to the party like always, but just wanted to chime in as a hobbyist photographer & I have gone back and forth on RAW in the past.

    Nowadays I shoot RAW+HQ JPEG
    I run linux so no photoshop or any of that, but have found The Gimp & Darktable very outstanding and very free!

    For nice nature shots with good lighting and everything, I just use the JPEG. Its much faster to process and usually looks great already. For a shot thats overblown sky or dark shadows, or the color balance is off, etc, it can be fixed better in RAW. For many advanced/technical shots wanting the most amount of detail where I am going to plan on a lot of processing then RAW is the best, like shooting the comet in the night sky, a bald eagle in flight, loon breaching from the water... I know I will want the slight extra detail and control that RAW provides.

    Originally posted by Neil View Post
    Most pictures, when viewed on-line, or via e-mail have been so compressed (a 4G jpg may be reduced to 200k or even less) that most editing, whether in RAW or Jpg, makes little difference. Then there is the quality of the screen the viewer is using. An iPhone? Cheap tablet? High end but poorly calibrated conventional screen? Viewed with a band of harsh sunlight running across half the screen?
    Yep, so many pics I see online are practically trash but so many people give em likes. I for one do most of my viewing on my computer, 4k screen 40". Most pics won't even fill the screen so I really appreciate those who go through the extra trouble of good editing and providing larger images. A well edited pic on large 4k is amazing! I had to go back and re edit so many of my earlier photography because once I viewed them on a good monitor I could tell the editing wasn't as good as it could've been. But even small phones now have amazing screen quality, and many of us do take the time to blow up images full screen, rotate our phones for landscape shots, and even zoom in. Most of course don't look beyond the timeline in Facebook that presents a post with 5 thumbnails all on a 1080 pixel wide screen. Their loss.
    I can't wait until 8k screen come down in price.

    Leave a comment:


  • autochromatica
    replied
    Originally posted by Dave Bourque View Post
    I have another photo related question that I'm curious how other photographers handle; How to do you share your photos? The most common site seams to be Facebook, a site that I am not a member of. Are people using some of the free or pay photo sharing sites?
    Dropbox is actually pretty good for sending photos to family. All my private stuff gets shared on there.

    Leave a comment:


  • MTVhike
    replied
    Most of the pictures I take now are with my iPhone, but I do have a Nikon DSLR, which I used to use a lot. Usually the JPG and RAW files look pretty similar, but in special circumstances, RAW can give you more detail. The convincing test was when I took a picture in the Johns Brook valley, along the Brook. Very bright and contrasty day. There were highlights on the rocks which were completely overexposed on the JPG copy, but I could reduce the contrast on the RAW file and pull out some detail.
    Back then, I used either Photoshop or, later Lightroom (which I was able to get on a DVD).

    Leave a comment:


  • Dave Bourque
    replied
    I have another photo related question that I'm curious how other photographers handle; How to do you share your photos? The most common site seams to be Facebook, a site that I am not a member of. Are people using some of the free or pay photo sharing sites?

    Leave a comment:


  • tcd
    commented on 's reply
    Thanks, that's a very good summary, and exactly the info I was looking for. Based on what my level of use will probably be, my priorities for this are "simple" and "free." So I will look into Darktable. Thanks again.

  • autochromatica
    replied
    Originally posted by tcd View Post
    I might want some kind of photo editing software, regardless of whether I'm shooting raw or jpg. I know this thread talks about Photoshop and Lightroom. I think I understand that Lightroom has more capability than Photoshop. So that's one comparison.

    I see Darktable mentioned above as a free alternative. I have also read about a free software called GNU Image Manipulation Program.

    Is there any good comparison review of all these out there?
    I've used all of these, even GIMP (funny -- I forgot what it stood for until you wrote it out). I've also used Capture 1. Maybe when I get time I'll scratch something out in detail.

    Photoshop & GIMP are the heavyweights, they're the ones you'll use if you spend 3 hours on one photo. Maybe because I started on Photoshop, but I always found GIMP too confusing.

    Lightroom is for simplifying a workflow, it has many of the tools that Photoshop has but they're deployed simpler. (Meaning it's easier to do complex edits in Photoshop, but quicker to bring in and process 200 photos in Lightroom.) Lightroom is terrific at organizing your photos and for quickly picking favorites and doing light edits like crop, exposure, white balance, and exporting.

    Capture 1 tries to be a sort of Photoshop-Lightroom mix but back when I used it, it was still a little clunky. And it's very expensive. (Note: Photoshop has something called 'Bridge' which is sort of like having Lightroom organization. Photoshop + Bridge is what Capture 1 reminds me of.)

    Darktable is unabashedly a Lightroom knock-off.

    Darktable & GIMP are freeware. Photoshop and Lightroom are (annoyingly) subscription. Capture 1 is expensive.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dave Bourque
    replied
    My new camera is a Lumix DC-ZS70. So far I really like it. It's a little bigger than my former point and shoot, a Canon PowerShot SX230, but has many more features. As I mentioned, I presently have it set up to save each image as jpg file and a raw file. I have plenty of storage so that isn't an issue but the raw files are building up and I'm not doing anything with them. I know the potential is there. Carl Heilman also offers a course on photo editing. I'm sure he exclusively uses Photoshop but the concepts should be similiar in Darktable. I'd go with PhotoShop if it wasn't for that damn subscription service. I won't use it enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • tcd
    replied
    FYI, I'm using a Canon S120, several years old.

    I selected it because it takes pretty good pictures, but more because it is compact and light and can be in my pocket when I'm climbing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Yury
    replied
    Originally posted by Dave Bourque View Post
    I wanted to stick with a compact digital point and shoot camera but would still like to use a quality camera. To that end I recently bought a camera that will save an image in the Raw format.
    Dave, what camera have you bought?

    Leave a comment:


  • Dave Bourque
    replied
    Thanking everyone for their input. I agree with TCD. It all boils down to which photo editor you choose. At this point, with the industry shifting to subscription services instead of ownership, the decision gets more complicated. I'm really not in favor of using a subscription service as I won't be a power user. It won't be a good value for me. To date I have never edited (other than cropping) my photos. I think it's time for me to start working with the images. I may just have to give Darkroom a try. If anyone stumbles on a good comparison review (as TCD mentions) please pass the information along.

    Thanks again,
    Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • Hear the Footsteps
    commented on 's reply
    My work is like Neil's.

    My all season camera only takes JPG.

    I'd owned Photoshop Elements 8 for over a decade or so. This year I used up a $75 gift card and bought Photoshop Elements 2020(PSE 2020) on the box but shows 18.0 on the startup screen. You outright own PSE.

    Features I like are adjusting dark and bright areas, adjusting color as many digital photos need it (Automatic option or Remove Colorcast). Infrequently I adjust Hue and Saturation. From what I've seen Smartphones do all these steps in the camera and that's why the images look nice and people just use them.

    My camera sensor has a dust spec that shows up in extreme zoom. PSE has the Healing Brush that'll patch that up....but I use that infrequently.

    For what I do PSE 2020 isn't all that different than PSE 8 with exception that it has filters for RAW files. That's why I bought it because I bought a camera that will take RAW images. And make sure the software does have the RAW filter for your camera. Adobe has a list will all the compatible cameras. I checked on that before I bought.

  • tcd
    replied
    I was into photography as a kid many decades ago (developing black and white in my father's tiny darkroom) Today, most of my photos are really quick point and shoot (usually with the rope wrapped around my arm so I can keep my partner on belay...). But I think I may get back more into photography in the future.

    I might want some kind of photo editing software, regardless of whether I'm shooting raw or jpg. I know this thread talks about Photoshop and Lightroom. I think I understand that Lightroom has more capability than Photoshop. So that's one comparison.

    I see Darktable mentioned above as a free alternative. I have also read about a free software called GNU Image Manipulation Program.

    Is there any good comparison review of all these out there?

    Leave a comment:


  • Neil
    replied
    Most pictures, when viewed on-line, or via e-mail have been so compressed (a 4G jpg may be reduced to 200k or even less) that most editing, whether in RAW or Jpg, makes little difference. Then there is the quality of the screen the viewer is using. An iPhone? Cheap tablet? High end but poorly calibrated conventional screen? Viewed with a band of harsh sunlight running across half the screen?
    So it boils down to what your intentions are for the image. Most of mine are probably viewed quickly then swiped from a dirty smart phone screen so I don't invest a lot of time in editing. About a minute per picture that I post. (one or more of crop, levels, increase/decrease saturation, contrast ) If I take 40 pictures on a hike I will keep between 10 and 15. When I view them at a later date I often think that 5 would have been better. I used to take a lot more but now I try to spend more time composing each shot and take less of the same one.

    With my P&S camera I nearly always shoot in manual mode with no "extras" (ie. no features such as vivid or warm or beach etc.). I figure this way that my jpg image will not be heavily processed by the camera before saving to the SD card.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X